Cengage Advantage Books: Business Law 9th Edition by Arnold Goldman ,William Sigismond

Exercise 10

Facts
Marlina, an up and coming actress from a small town, got her first break after graduating from a well-known college as a theatre major. She auditioned and then signed a contract on January 30, 2010, to play a major role in a serious summer production drama for the "Upcoming Production Company" (UPC). The contract called for a guaranteed salary of $8,000 for a twelve-week run during the months of June, July, and August. The play was to run seven nights a week. Marlina had turned down other opportunities, claiming that the UPC summer theatre play would give her more public exposure. In preparation for upcoming role in the play, she took a three-week refresher course in acting through a well-known theatrical school. On March 2010, she was notified by UPC of their intention not to go through with her contract because they (UPC) had discovered an actress they felt was more naturally adapted to the role than she (Marlina). Marlina sued UPC but made no attempt to secure a similar position with another production company, although positions for the same role were proven to be substantially the same as the role UPC offered to her and for approximately the same salary.
At Trial
Upcoming Production Company indicated that Marlina had a legal duty to reduce her damages; that is, attempt to search for or actually find employment substantially similar to that offered by UPC in their contract with her. Marlina claimed that she did not look for other opportunities because in her opinion there were none as valuable to her career plans as the one offered by UPC; in her mind, all other opportunities were inferior. UPC, however, offered researched facts and figures that showed there were opportunities equal to the UPC opportunity, including salary, and that it was only Marlina's opinion that she could not do better.
Questions
1. The UPC stated that Marlina had a legal duty to search for employment substantially similar to that offered by them. What is the legal terminology used to identify this duty?
2. Was Marlina correct in not looking for substantially similar employment? Why or why not?
3. I f Marlina found employment elsewhere that was substantially similar to that offered by UPC, could she still sue for damages for breach of contract? And should she win, what formula would be applied to determine the amount of damages to which she was entitled?